Sweet! Thanks Steve! Hopefully I didn't break anything :-S
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have merged the dev branches into master on my machine and tagged all of > the plugins. I am planning on merging this into master tomorrow if no one > has any issues. > > I will also send a review request for the plugin release blog once I finish > it tomorrow. > > Tracking everything at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4915 > > -Steve > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Michael, >> >> Good point. I think the issue arrises if some of our users keep using 3.0, >> install plugins using the git url (master branch) and then try to remove >> the plugins using the 3.0 documentation. When the master branch gets >> updated, it won't have core in the ID. This will make the remove >> instructions incorrect. >> >> An upgrade guide/blog post actually sounds like the best way to handle >> this issue. >> >> I am going to pick up where Anis left of and aim to do a plugin release >> later this afternoon >> >> -Steve >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> It could be a doc or or blog post, I would suggest blog post for plugins >>> for more details about dealing with registry since those have a faster >>> pace >>> >>> --Carlos >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com >>> >wrote: >>> >>> > Would suggest we document a simple workflow document "Upgrade Guide >>> > Cordova CLI/PlugMan 3.0 to 3.1" >>> > Same way that we do for the platforms on going over the details in a >>> > single document. >>> > >>> > --Carlos >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> I think the 3.0 instructions of removing the old plugin with the old ID >>> >> remain correct even after we update the registry. Thats because when >>> >> removing plugins from a workspace you use the ID of whats locally >>> >> installed. >>> >> >>> >> So, to upgrade, users would have the use the 3.0 uninstall guide and >>> the >>> >> 3.1 install guide.. I think? >>> >> >>> >> -Michal >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > That's a good summary. I am going to be fixing the reference problem >>> >> > shortly and merge them back to the `dev` branch. Not sure if all of >>> >> > Jesse's changes have made it to the `dev` branch yet. >>> >> > >>> >> > The `edge` docs have already been updated (see CB-4493) >>> >> > >>> >> > The `3.0` docs will have to be updated once we merge `dev` back to >>> >> > `master` (which I hope we will before we release 3.1). >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com >>> > >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > > I realize why Anis decided to do a new branch (3.1.0) because he >>> >> didn't >>> >> > > want to mess up dev/master. Before we release 3.1.0 we need to do a >>> >> > plugin >>> >> > > release based off of >>> >> > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StepsForPluginRelease. >>> >> > > Jesse has changes for the plugins that he has pushed to dev now >>> based >>> >> on >>> >> > > this email thread. He needs these changes to be in the next plugin >>> >> > release >>> >> > > we are doing for the 3.1.0 release. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > If I am understanding this correctly, removing core from ID was not >>> >> > > something we want in master due to 3.0.0 support. But this ID >>> change >>> >> > should >>> >> > > have been done on dev before creating the 3.1.0 branch. The 3.0.0 >>> docs >>> >> > get >>> >> > > users to install plugins using the git url. The problem is that the >>> >> 3.0.0 >>> >> > > docs instruct our users to use the ID for plugin removal. Obviously >>> >> if we >>> >> > > change the ID, the remove documentation for 3.0.0 would be wrong. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > We have two options here as far as I can tell >>> >> > > >>> >> > > 1) Leave master alone for the next month or two and give people >>> time >>> >> to >>> >> > > migrate to 3.1 >>> >> > > 2) Update the 3.0 documentation to refer to updated id, Push the >>> >> updated >>> >> > ID >>> >> > > to dev then master. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Things that need to be done >>> >> > > - Fix incorrect references to the old ID (last comment on >>> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4889) >>> >> > > - Merge these changes into dev (they really should be on dev if >>> that >>> >> is >>> >> > > where we all the work done) >>> >> > > - Follow steps on >>> >> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StepsForPluginReleaseand >>> >> > > publish these plugins on our registry. This should include Jesse's >>> >> work >>> >> > as >>> >> > > well. >>> >> > > - Update edge docs to refer to registry for plugin installation >>> (not >>> >> > sure >>> >> > > if this has been done) >>> >> > > - Update 3.0.0 documentation if we decide option 2 from above is >>> the >>> >> way >>> >> > > to go >>> >> > > - Tag docs 3.1.0-rc1 >>> >> > > >>> >> > > I volunteer to take the lead on getting the plugins released + >>> tested >>> >> > > (supposed to be today according to Andrew's timeline) for tomorrow >>> >> > > afternoon. I can get to the docs after that. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Before I dive into this full steam, any feedback on above? >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org >>> > >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > > >>> >> > >> Just to be super duper clear: the reason to work on 'dev' branch >>> of >>> >> > plugins >>> >> > >> is not some process decision we are imposing, its a direct >>> >> requirement >>> >> > >> imposed on us by the limitations of our tools (specifically, the >>> >> state >>> >> > of >>> >> > >> the registry as it was with 3.0 launch). >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> We discussed this in-depth just a week ago (Read "About plugins in >>> >> > 3.1"), >>> >> > >> and I think several other times over the last month, if you would >>> >> like >>> >> > to >>> >> > >> read up on the details look there. >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> No one likes the situation, we've been making headway into fixing >>> it >>> >> > ever >>> >> > >> since we discovered the problem, and it can be resolved as soon as >>> >> users >>> >> > >> upgrade from 3.0 (maybe that means we can switch after 3.1 >>> release, >>> >> > maybe >>> >> > >> that means we wait for some 3-months deprecation time, not sure). >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> -Michal >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Braden Shepherdson < >>> >> > bra...@chromium.org >>> >> > >> >wrote: >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> > I agree with Joe that developing on anything other than master >>> >> sucks. >>> >> > But >>> >> > >> > unfortunately, our hands are tied in the near term because the >>> >> > registry >>> >> > >> > doesn't know to fetch plugins from anywhere else. Also it makes >>> >> life >>> >> > >> easier >>> >> > >> > for being who are installing plugins from git URLs. >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > I think we eventually want to get to a world where 99% of plugin >>> >> > installs >>> >> > >> > are happening from the registry, the registry knows how to fetch >>> >> tags, >>> >> > >> and >>> >> > >> > people who are using git URLs directly know what they're doing >>> and >>> >> > want >>> >> > >> the >>> >> > >> > dev version. (Also you can specify branches with #gitref in the >>> >> URL, >>> >> > so >>> >> > >> > there's flexibility there.) But we're not there yet. >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > Braden >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > > Yes, let's get this cleared up - confused myself. >>> >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 3:52 AM, Anis KADRI < >>> >> anis.ka...@gmail.com> >>> >> > >> > wrote: >>> >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > > 3.1.0 is coincidental and it's temporary for this release >>> >> because >>> >> > I >>> >> > >> > > > wasn't sure where to get the code from and didn't want to >>> >> > compromise >>> >> > >> > > > master or dev. I could have called it something else. >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> > > > Jesse, I'd advise you to commit to dev. Everything will be >>> >> merged >>> >> > to >>> >> > >> > > > master eventually. >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> > > > So to re-iterate the process: right now it's "dev -> master" >>> >> and >>> >> > >> > > > eventually it will be "master -> (independant) plugin >>> version". >>> >> > >> > > > amarite? >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> > > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Joe Bowser < >>> >> bows...@gmail.com> >>> >> > >> > wrote: >>> >> > >> > > > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Andrew Grieve < >>> >> > >> agri...@chromium.org >>> >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > > wrote: >>> >> > >> > > > >> Plugins are not tagged nor branched along with platforms. >>> >> They >>> >> > are >>> >> > >> > > > releases >>> >> > >> > > > >> completely independently. >>> >> > >> > > > >> >>> >> > >> > > > >> Commit to the "dev" branch always. >>> >> > >> > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > AND FOREVER!!!!!11!!eleventyone!!! >>> >> > >> > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > Seriously, can't we have a stable branch instead? Having >>> the >>> >> dev >>> >> > >> > > > > branch for dev on plugins and having master for dev on >>> >> > platforms is >>> >> > >> > > > > stupid and makes it harder to do work. >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Carlos Santana >>> > <csantan...@gmail.com> >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Carlos Santana >>> <csantan...@gmail.com> >>> >> >>
